V.M.JOSE Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE sole question is regarding the challenge against the acceptance of the tender submitted by the fourth respondent. The petitioner is a registered contractor and Ext.P1 is the copy of the tender notice. It is invited for executing some transportation works. The question is whether the revised P.W.D. Manual will apply as far as the tender is concerned. According to the petitioner, the revised P.W.D. Manual will apply. The petitioner submitted a tender for two works which are assigned as Serial Nos.16 and 17 in Ext.P1. According to him, in the light of the revised P.W.D. Manual, he has quoted 25% below the Probable Amount of Contract (PAC) even though he was prepared to undertake the work 30% below the PAC. On the date of opening of the tender, viz. 9.7.2012 it was revealed that the fourth respondent has quoted 25.1% below the PAC which is contrary to the terms of Ext.P1 as well as the revised P.W.D. Manual. Exts.P2 and P3 are produced to show that the revised P.W.D. Manual has been implemented in respect of other works whereby the contractors have quoted 25% below the PAC and the successful tenderer was selected by taking lot.

(2.) RESPONDENTS 3 and 4 have filed separate counter affidavits. In the counter affidavit filed by the third respondent, it is pointed out that the revised PWD Manual having more than 600 pages, has not yet been printed and published. 100% implementation of the revised P.W.D. Manual has not been effected so far, as the discussions on various aspects are going on. There are representations from the contractors to amend the clauses which are causing hardship to them. Herein, the lowest tender was of the fourth respondent which was accepted. It is stated in para 8 that the work is tendered based on the existing P.W.D. Manual (old). In the tender document itself it is made clear that Earnest Money Deposit, Security deposit, etc. are based on the old P.W.D. Manual. Therefore, the revised P.W.D. Manual is not applicable herein. In para 10 it is pointed out that in respect of certain other tenders for the financial year 2012-2013, the petitioner himself has quoted 50% below the estimate rate and the agreement has been executed in terms of the old P.W.D. Manual. The security deposit is only 5% of the PAC whereas the revised Manual insists for security deposit of 10% of the PAC. It is also stated that in the revised Manual no clause is added for civil works and herein it is only conveyance of bitumen from Ambalamughal to Nedumangad and Neyyattinkara.

(3.) HEARD parties.